From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 10 14:56:30 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AEEB16A419 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:56:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (unknown [IPv6:2a01:170:102f::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 615D613C461 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:56:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m0AEuRer060408; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:56:27 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id m0AEuRW5060407; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:56:27 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:56:27 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200801101456.m0AEuRW5060407@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, aryeh.friedman@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <47862929.50901@gmail.com> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-current User-Agent: tin/1.8.3-20070201 ("Scotasay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/6.2-STABLE-20070808 (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:56:28 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: FreeBSD's problems as seen by the BSDForen.de community X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, aryeh.friedman@gmail.com List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:56:30 -0000 Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: > Oliver Fromme wrote: > > Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: > > > Just a side question... if it is so complete why was there a need to > > > modify the orginal UCB version?... specifically there is no reason not > > > to discuss improvements. > > > > The modification that happened was to remove restrictions. > > What you propose is to add restrictions, which means that > > it would be less free. That's a step backwards and will > > not happen. > > Which are completely optional (adding options is always good) Optional clauses are useless. They don't add anything to the license, because you already have the option to do anything that's not expressedly forbidden by the existing clauses. > > The OP's posting rather sounds like regression testing and > > QA needs to be improved. > > Which are always unglamorous jobs and thus the least likelly to be > done without some kind of reward greater then a pat on the back. I think the RE team already does quite a good job, and it is my impression that it gets better with every release. FreeBSD already _does_ have a quite extensive regression testing framework; have a look at src/tools/regression. Of course there's always room for improvement and expansion. > "Free software != Free beer" I think that's an oversimplification that misses the spirit of the BSD license, and how it is different from licenses such as the GPL. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd "I made up the term 'object-oriented', and I can tell you I didn't have C++ in mind." -- Alan Kay, OOPSLA '97